Another Immortals Handbook thread

[Upper_Krust]

Hiya mate!

You have a table, where you sort things into static or dynamic. The ability scores mentioning is italicized there, but the asterisk leads to an uncompleted text.

Ah yes, thats in the article on epic feats though, you said it was in the article on absolutes - thats where I got confused.

The reason Ability Scores is italicised is that I am not sure exactly which category they should fit into. By the CR/EL rules, a feat should be worth a +2 bonus to an ability score. However we can't allow such a feat at non-epic levels without unbalancing most of the feats as well. We could assume that a non-epic version of Great Charisma (for example) could be +1, and the epic version could be +2, but again thats probably still going to unbalance a lot of existing feats.

So perhaps the epic feat should stay +1 and there should be no non-epic feat?

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey U_K!

Hiya historian matey!

Couple of questions:

Fire away!

1. Have you developed a "Planck-Ball" or "Big Bang" spell yet?

I did for the 'old system', by that I mean the one that didn't exactly work out, whereby a double double was a quadruple, rather than a triple. It worked out to be something like a 115th-level spell.

2. If so, what level would one need to be to cast it? Time Lord? High Lord?

Under the auspices of the new system I am not yet sure if Big Bang spell swill be practical at all. I think we are talking High Lord at the very least now...if even then.

Thanks dude.

Anytime mate.

 

[Alzrius]

Try refreshing the page.

And here that never occured to me. It seems that for some reason the web browser I was using wouldn't update the page even after I refreshed it...which was odd, since it seemed fine with every other page I've looked at. A different browser did the trick though.

Why? The damage for the plane of fire was listed in Manual of the Planes. The damage for Lava is detailed in the Dungeon Masters Guide.

I'm aware of where they're listed, I'm just saying it doesn't make sense that Prime material lava is hotter than total exposure to the Plane of Fire.

If deity characters are immune to everything I list on the website as standard then it drammatically reduces the options a DM can bring to bear upon such immortal characters.

Which makes for a better game, IMHO. Now the DM and the characters have to start thinking of new and creative solutions for overcoming enemies. Changing immunities to high levels of resistances just encourages power creep, which is far more likely to ruin a game (again IMHO). Creativity can be spurred by working within boundaries.

They say ignorance is bliss.

They also say not to jump on the bandwagon.

It makes sense - to me thats an improvement.

It doesn't make sense - to me that's not an improvement. I see this as just another pitch that seems sexy ("Fixing the problems that you didn't know existed!") but doesn't necessitate anything being better.

So are you saying the god of fire shouldn't be able to burn a fire giant? Or that a fire giant should be able to survive at the suns core?

At the sun's core, no...how would he breathe? In regards to the god of fire not being able to burn a fire giant...I can certainly see the case for that. A creature with the fire subtype is, to me, partially made of fire (perhaps not physically, but it's part of their essence), so it couldn't burn them.

And even if that wasn't the case, I don't see the problem with single, specific cases of being able to overcome an immunity. Suppose there is a feat that lets your character burn Fire creatures with a fire spell...so what? The ridiculous part of his essay is where he assumes that this will spiral into a one-upping circus of feats and powers that then grant immunity to the exception, and exceptions that overcome that immunity, etc. I say, one immunity, and one exception to it...after that, it should stop.

You use the word ruin like its an on/off switch...as if it were an absolute you could say.

Considering I'm using it in the context you laid down, what does that say about you?

I certainly don't think the liches immunities are a positive aspect, and they are certainly illogical as well, but it would be melodrammatic for me to say they would ruin someones game.

But if your PCs are all immortals with the immunities I list on the website then yes I would say that will ultimately ruin your game.

I disagree. I don't think they will, and neither did a lot of people (yourself included) who had given epic/immortal gaming careful thought prior to SKR's article. A week ago, you knew all those immunities were there, and didn't think they'd ruin an epic/immortal game.

The Model T Ford automobile worked but few people drive them today. It wasn't 'broken' but the cars today are 'better', thats progress.

Tell it to the SUV.

It means don't be afraid of evolution.

The implication being that my arguements are based on fear? They're not. I honestly don't think this change is necessary, nor necessarily an improvement (though I won't say it's necessarily worse either).

Don't forget that evolution spawns a lot of freakish creatures that die off quickly, also.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hiya mate!

Yeah...I'm kinda wishy-washy on that idea. On the one hand, I agree that it would be cool, but on the other hand, I'm wondering about the game balance. White dragons are, after all, one of the weaker species

I don't see a problem with game balance in this regard.

- giving them the ability to freeze someone makes them a lot more powerful, especially since other dragons' breath weapons (besides shadow) don't have special powers.

You mean not yet they don't.

There are mental effects? I was using a Con check, because the most visibile effects are physical - the metabolism slows way down, systems start shutting down, and eventually, if not curbed, the body stops completely as it loses the energy to keep going.

According to one website I visited, hypothermia can lead to confusion and disorientation.

Sounds about right. What about creatures with the Cold subtype (assuming you could actually do that)? lol

I'm not totally sure. Going by the fire resistance example, a creature with the cold subtype should be immune to cold altogether - which is an idea I don't really agree with; I mean if you can freeze liquid nitrogen, you can darn well freeze a frost giant or a white dragon. So I'll have to give that some thought.

Oh, ok. My bad.

My mistake really, I just opted for a quick and simple explanation.

I know that - that's why I specifically didn't mention water, I said heat. The best way to treat frostbite is skin-to-skin contact with a warm body, preferably insulated in blankets or something to keep the heat in. But, I wasn't sure about adding the "severe heat" thing, thinking along the same lines you were - more than the safe temp deals extra damage. So yeah, I'll agree with you on that.

The flash-freeze effect? I like that.

I quite like that one myself.

I mentioned that he should be treated as having the Vulnerability to Fire ability, which is essentially the same thing.

Ah, okay.

I don't either. I'm sure it has a couple similar ones; I think there's a spell called frostbite in there, but I'm not sure what it does (cold damage or something...).

I probably should have bought those things when I had the chance to buy them cheap at the RPG convention here in Belfast in June.

 

[Zoatebix]

This is mainly for Alzrius regarding the elemental plane of fire doing less damage than lava, but I think it's totally interesting and keen.

Lava should do more damage because temperature isn't the only factor when dealing with thermodynamics. In fact - it isn't the biggest factor by far. Why do you think one doesn't thaw frozen food in the oven? Check out the experiment from scenes 5, 6, and 7 form this cooking show: http://www.goodeatsfanpage.com/Season3/Duck/DuckTranscript.htm

To summarize: Alton Brown tries melting several identical ice sculptures shaped like ducks through various means. One is left in the fridge, one placed in a 200 degree oven, one in boiling water, and one held under cold running water.

AB: Ah, Paul. Do we have a winner?
PAUL: [enters with ducks melted in a variety of conditions]

Just as I suspected. Even after all this time the refrigerator duck is relatively unmarred. What is surprising, however, is that the oven duck faired even better than the submerged-in-cold-water duck. Which just goes to show that temperature can't hold sway over density and conductivity. Of course, when you add heat back into the equation, i.e. the boiling-water duck, well, that basically looks like, I don't know ...

AB: ... what would you say, Paul, a blue bar of soap? Yeah. Uh, now where's the
under-cold-running-water duck?
PAUL: [indicates a bowl of water]
AB: Oh, well, there you have it.

In the rock-paper-scissors world of thermodynamics convection, density and conduction win out even over high temperature.

Anywho - the atmosphere of the elemental plane of fire would have to be a ridiculously hot in order to cause the same damage (which I'm guessing is roughly proportional to heat/energy transfer) as very, very dense lava.
-George

 

[Zoatebix]

Scene 9 has good stuff on steam cooking, too. Yay thermodynamics!

 

[Alzrius]

EDIT: Hm, something seems to have altered the image.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Alzrius dude!

And here that never occured to me. It seems that for some reason the web browser I was using wouldn't update the page even after I refreshed it...which was odd, since it seemed fine with every other page I've looked at. A different browser did the trick though.

Glad its okay now.

I'm aware of where they're listed, I'm just saying it doesn't make sense that Prime material lava is hotter than total exposure to the Plane of Fire.

I think it makes perfect sense. For starters the Plane of Fire isn't a big fireball (or Sun for that matter). If it was, the City of Brass would melt.

Which makes for a better game, IMHO. Now the DM and the characters have to start thinking of new and creative solutions for overcoming enemies.

Gaining a new power/item is not a creative solution, and forcing players to gain power 'x' to overcome enemy 'y' is contrived and tantamount to railroading.

Changing immunities to high levels of resistances just encourages power creep, which is far more likely to ruin a game (again IMHO).

Wrong.

By removing the absolute nature of an immunity you make its acquisition less important.

Creativity can be spurred by working within boundaries.

But you are not working within any boundaries, you are closing off one section and opening another. Which means you are alienating everything thats come before.

They also say not to jump on the bandwagon.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

It doesn't make sense - to me that's not an improvement. I see this as just another pitch that seems sexy ("Fixing the problems that you didn't know existed!") but doesn't necessitate anything being better.

If we had as many people playing immortal campaigns as non-immortal campaigns I am sure the problem would have been recognised long ago.

At the sun's core, no...how would he breathe?

You are dodging the obvious here. Lets say for the sake of argument the giant is holding his breath - or if the gets hit by a spell that duplicates the effects of the big bang, according to you the giant is okay...am I correct?

In regards to the god of fire not being able to burn a fire giant...I can certainly see the case for that. A creature with the fire subtype is, to me, partially made of fire (perhaps not physically, but it's part of their essence), so it couldn't burn them.

A fire would even be destroyed by a much hotter fire.

And even if that wasn't the case, I don't see the problem with single, specific cases of being able to overcome an immunity. Suppose there is a feat that lets your character burn Fire creatures with a fire spell...so what? The ridiculous part of his essay is where he assumes that this will spiral into a one-upping circus of feats and powers that then grant immunity to the exception, and exceptions that overcome that immunity, etc. I say, one immunity, and one exception to it...after that, it should stop.

So I can have MegaFlames, but not MegaFlame Immunity.

Considering I'm using it in the context you laid down, what does that say about you?

It says that my use of words differing from yours is a sort of microcosm of this argument - in that everything to you is black and white.

I disagree. I don't think they will, and neither did a lot of people (yourself included) who had given epic/immortal gaming careful thought prior to SKR's article. A week ago, you knew all those immunities were there, and didn't think they'd ruin an epic/immortal game.

Well for the record a lot of the immunities in D&Dg were not present in the IH. But I must admit SKRs article was revelatory.

Sometimes its difficult to see the wood for the trees.

Tell it to the SUV.

...and how many 100 year old SUVs do you see being driven on the roads?

The implication being that my arguements are based on fear? They're not.

Well I am thinking more along the lines or reticence and trepidation rather than fear and panic.

They're not. I honestly don't think this change is necessary, nor necessarily an improvement (though I won't say it's necessarily worse either).

I think its quite clearly an improvement. I thought SKRs article did a great job of pointing out the illogic of absolutes.

Don't forget that evolution spawns a lot of freakish creatures that die off quickly, also.

If they don't adapt that is.

 

[Wolv0rine]

Yeah...I'm kinda wishy-washy on that idea. On the one hand, I agree that it would be cool, but on the other hand, I'm wondering about the game balance. White dragons are, after all, one of the weaker species - giving them the ability to freeze someone makes them a lot more powerful, especially since other dragons' breath weapons (besides shadow) don't have special powers.

Eh, I don't think that's a problem, Kerr. If you're going so far as to add an effect based on logical conclusion to the white dragon's cold breath (possible freezing), it's a simple matter to add such effects to other breath weapons; a victim of a fire breath will contune to burn until put out (and suffer from burn wounds until healed), a victim of acid breath will continue to..well.. burn (and also suffer burn wounds), etc. You just have to go that far. Of course, if one doesn't want to go that far, it doesn't make much sense to Begin the process, granted.

 

[CRGreathouse]

You are dodging the obvious here. Lets say for the sake of argument the giant is holding his breath - or if the gets hit by a spell that duplicates the effects of the big bang, according to you the giant is okay...am I correct?

I don't really like this setup, as I don't think the fire giant should have the fire subtype in the first place. In the case of a creature such as a fire elemental, though, I don't think that any level of fire or heat as such should be able to harm it -- although possibly some fire creatures (probably not a fire elemental, though) could be 'extinguished' by having another fire consume all the oxygen in the area.

The big bang would kill just about any reasonable creature; the temperature is the least of its effects. The pressure from the rapid expansion would deal millions of dice of damage, and the radiation would do dozens if not hundreds of dice of Con damage.

...and how many 100 year old SUVs do you see being driven on the roads?

I think that was actually his original point.